I completely agree. Like the previous comment mentioned, I've explored this area over the past year, and in my tests, the offerings from Amazon, Google, and Microsoft were far superior to the open-source options, especially for long documents. It's unfortunate, but that's the way it is.

OCR itself isn't the issue; most open-source models handle that adequately. The problem lies in the lack of comprehensive features:

- Identification of chapters and headings

- Segmentation of headers and footers with an easy way to filter them out

- Handling of images

- Correctly processing two-column or other non-standard layouts

- Avoiding out-of-memory (OOM) errors, which, while not a flaw of the open-source software itself, is a common and frustrating issue

- Transcription of tables and forms, which exists in open-source models but isn't as effective

These ergonomic features are where the open-source solutions fall short.